P. v. Eatmon
Defendant and appellant Kevin Eatmon appeals the judgment and sentence imposed following his jury trial conviction for first degree burglary. Appellant contends the trial court erred by giving CALCRIM 359 (Corpus Delicti) and CALCRIM 362 (Consciousness of Guilt). Appellant also contends there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that an occupant was present in the home at the time of the burglary, and that such finding should have been submitted to the jury rather than decided by the court. Court affirm.
Comments on P. v. Eatmon